<$BlogRSDURL$>

My letters

Submitted letters to the editor and other parties. Only a few of these were published.

Friday, April 30, 2004


To the letters editor of The Post:

Andrea Peyser says she is a Libertarian ("The Madame Defarge of the New York Post," New York Magazine, April 26, 2004, second-from-last paragraph). Later, she comes close to recommending dynamite for some homes and small businesses in Brooklyn ("ARENA PLAN IS HIS ANXIETY COMPLEX," The Post, April 27, 2004). A real libertarian would never suggest dynamiting the private property of peaceful people without the owner's consent.
____________________________________

Wednesday, April 28, 2004


To the letters editor:

No, Andrea, the rail yards you saw in Brooklyn are not, as you called them, an "open sewer" ("ARENA PLAN IS HIS ANXIETY COMPLEX," April 27, 2004). That's sparkling new Long Island Railroad cars in the yards, not human waste. I guess it will always be true that some people can't tell shit from shinola.
____________________________________

(0) comments

Friday, April 23, 2004


To the letters editor:

What are Phonics Fascists (“Lam Excuses,” Letters, April 21-27)? People who won’t brook opposing opinion, such as those who would dismiss someone as a phonics fascist instead of engaging in debate? Why does the left hate phonics? Thirty years of research have shown that some students can learn to read in the absence of phonics and some cannot. Of those that cannot, children from middle- and upper-class families learn to read by getting supplementary reading education at home (phonics); children from lower-income families do not. Once again, the left is hurting most the people it claims to represent, and simply indulging its own ideological fantasies.
____________________________________

(0) comments

Thursday, April 15, 2004


If the people at tobacco.org think that Rheingold beer ads might be encouraging lawbreaking, then good for Rheingold ("Beer ads full of boos for Bloomy," April 12). Breaking stupid, oppressive, and evil laws follows in the great American tradition of Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and Rosa Parks.
____________________________________

(0) comments

Monday, April 12, 2004


To the letters editor [as submitted]:

I was a little surprised that Pakistan might be bribed to relinquish its claim on Kashmir (Peace is in progress for India-Pakistan, March 9, 2004) but appalled that it would be the good ol' USA who would pay the bribe, or rather, the good ol' US taxpayer. Of all the taxpayers in the world, why should I be the one hit up for the bribe money? Republicans and Democrats are all too quick to spend my money on everything imaginable, no matter how far-fetched. Fortunately, there is one political party that is always extremely stingy with taxpayers' money, and that is the Libertarian Party. Interested readers may go to www.lp.org or www.ny.lp.org for more information.

To the letters editor [as published]:

I was a little surprised that Pakistan might be bribed to relinquish its claim on Kashmir ("Peace is in progress for India-Pakistan", Opinion, March 9, 2004) but appalled that it would be the good ol' USA who would pay it, or rather, the good ol' taxpayer. Of all the taxpayers in the world, why should I be the one hit up for the money?
___________________________________

(0) comments

April 12, 2004

To the letters editor:

Congratulations to Senator Golden for committing civil disobedience and flying the American flag (“Fly Flags Free of Permits, Say Local Advocates,” Flatbush Life, April 12). Flying the flag is a form of political speech, and Americans do not need permission from government to engage in it. With all the assaults on speech these days, from both the right and the left, from politically-correct college speech codes to the shameful McCain-Feingold incumbent-protection-and-suppression-of-political-speech Act to FCC fines for broadcast indecency (People in government deciding what is indecent! Ha!), we need more folks who will defy the encroachment of government on our inalienable liberties. If booksellers can clog our sidewalks under protection of the first amendment, surely Americans can fly the flag without permission.
____________________________________

(0) comments

Pledge a lemon
Brooklyn: With all the fuss about God in the Pledge of Allegiance ("God and the Supremes," March 25), the legitimacy of the Pledge itself is being ignored. Why should people be required to pledge loyalty to the state when there is no cause to think them disloyal?
____________________________________

(0) comments

February 25, 2004

Educrats — Be Careful!

Dear Editor:

Many thanks for reporting on the recent education forum ("Angry Parents Heat Up School Meeting," Canarsie Courier, Feb. 5) at which members of the audience asked questions and voiced concerns to a panel consisting of elected officials and one regional superintendent, Gloria Buckery.

One parent complained that a particular teacher was not teaching the appropriate material; another complained that an incompetent teacher was still teaching.

The uniform response from the panel was that the education system needed more money, even though the concerns expressed were patently not matters of money. A teacher teaching the wrong material is a matter of management; inability to fire an incompetent teacher is a matter of union work rules.

But the educrats should be careful what they wish for. The Department of Education readily [sic, should be "already"] spends almost $12,000 per year per pupil. If that figure should rise to $15,000 per year, or $20,000, the taxpayer at some point will notice that public education costs more than the most expensive private school, as will members of city and state legislatures who are responsible for balancing budgets.

It would become cheaper just to pay to send every child to a private school, and with better results, and be the end of public education as we know it.

Those who say, "I support public education. I want to fix the public schools, not destroy them" at any cost, may be hastening the demise of the institution they claim to want to support.
______________________________________

(0) comments

To the letters editor:

All the public discussion about the City Council’s new law regarding toy guns has only one defect: the discussion is all wrong. The relevant wording of the legislation is this:



Intro No. 298-2002. It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or offer for sale, possess or use or attempt to use or give away, any toy or imitation firearm which substantially duplicates or can reasonably be perceived to be an actual firearm.

The emphasis is mine. So a bright orange water pistol, which does not substantially duplicate an actual firearm, nor could reasonably be perceived to be an actual firearm, would seem to be legal under this law. The law doesn’t ban toy guns that could be painted black or otherwise modified to look like real guns; it bans only toys that look like real guns.

If misunderstanding of the law succeeds in preventing potential felons from obtaining toys to use in rapes and robberies, and they turn to whittling bars of soap into the shape of a gun, and painting it black, will the City Council ban bar soap?

Meanwhile, I intend not to give up possession of my Super-Soaker.
______________________________________

(0) comments

To the letters editor:

I am now turning 65 and will soon start receiving my Social Security benefits. The money I paid into the system was subject to income tax at the time—there is no deduction for payments into the Social Security System. I will now be getting a measly return, with no accumulated cash value to leave to my heirs, which will be subject to income tax again when I receive it.

Every twenty- and thirty-something in the country should be doing all they can to replace the current scam with a fair retirement system that will have real value to them thirty and forty years from now. The most libertarian plan would be one that emphasizes freedom and choice, and personal responsibility. Sure some Americans might make bad decisions about their retirement, but as things stand now the government makes the worst possible decisions and imposes them on all of us by force.
___________________________________

(0) comments

Sen. Charles Schumer
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton
Rep. Major R. Owens

Dear Public Servant,

Today there arrived in the mail an analysis of my Social Security account through the year 2000. In the 46 years I have worked (through 2000), my employers and I have “contributed” a total of $151,191 to the system. When I start receiving benefits in 16 months, after paying in tens of thousands of dollars more just for 2001, 2002, and 2003 alone, I will get $1,696 per month. At that rate, it will take me more than 89 months to get back just the contribution, never minding that much of that money has been in the system for 20, 30, 40 years and should easily have doubled, quadrupled, and more in that time. Worse, if that money had been invested wisely it would amount to millions of dollars by now. Instead, I get a measly monthly pittance from it with none of it to leave to my wife, daughter, and grandchildren. I am angry that you people have stolen millions of dollars from the total retirement assets of an ordinary working person, me. Little wonder that members of congress aren’t required to “contribute” to this heartbreaking thievery but have a different retirement plan for which ordinary working people aren’t good enough. Do you have anything to say to justify your role in this unconscionable scam?

I am sending a copy of this letter to the Courier-Life Papers in Brooklyn as a letter to the editor. I will send them also your response.
_____________________________________

(0) comments

To the letters editor:

Whenever I read that our indefatigable representative in Congress Nydia Velazquez has “secured federal funding” for some pork-barrel project in our neighborhood, I can feel my wallet getting lighter (“Four Local Groups Get Ready to Split Million Dollar Pie,” Park Slope Courier, Feb. 24). One has to know that in exchange for the privilege of getting $1.1 million of our money back for us, Ms. Velazquez had to agree to vote “yes” on the favorite pork projects of hundreds of other congresspersons from all over the country. New York always gets back less from Washington than it sends; the funding formulas discriminate against the northeast. Every time a pork pie is sliced up and sent all over the country, New Yorkers get a little poorer. Ms. Velazquez can do her constituents, and all Americans, a genuine service by ending such spending and reducing our federal taxes by an equal amount.
_______________________________

(0) comments

To the letters editor:

The big loser in the current controversy over toy guns is freedom, the freedom of parents to decide what kinds of toys their children play with. While the death of a youngster is a tragedy, it is a much greater tragedy for the public to clamor to have its freedom taken away in quest of an unattainable goal. Does anyone on the City Council speak for freedom? Does freedom have a constituency?

What would George Washington say if he knew that government was abrogating freedom while foolishly concerning itself with the minutæ of toys? Did his brave men die in vain?
_________________________________

(0) comments

To the letters editor:

The very idea of minimum-wage legislation is anti-freedom and anti-American (“Advocates Urge Increase in Minimum Wage,” Flatbush Life, April 5). I will soon be retired from my day job and will want to work for a buck-ninety-five an hour to keep busy. But the government tells me I am not “allowed” to do that. The government gives me “permission” to work at some wage of its choosing but not at some other wage of my own choosing. Sheeeez. Vote Libertarian, I swear.
________________________________

(0) comments

To the letters editor:

If toy guns become illegal in New York, what will happen when the police arrest two 8-year-old black boys in Harlem having a water fight with squirt guns? The very members of the City Council who promoted this law will be the first to scream against its enforcement. A law against toys will be no more successful in ridding the city of toys than the laws against guns are in ridding the city of guns, but instead will make criminals out of 8-year-olds.
________________________________

(0) comments

January 25, 2004

To the editor:

Erik Engquist's assertion that "[Wal-Mart's] refusal to sell [the morning-after abortion pill] probably leads to unintended pregnancies" is wrong (Flatbush Life, Jan. 26, 2004). Erik is old enough to learn about the birds and the bees. Wal-Mart's behavior does not lead to pregnancies. (Erik, if you want to know what "leads to" pregnancy, ask your parents.)

It that what Erik will teach his children about unintended pregnancies, blame it on Wal-Mart?
_________________________________

(0) comments

Archives

04/01/2004 - 05/01/2004   06/01/2004 - 07/01/2004   07/01/2004 - 08/01/2004   08/01/2004 - 09/01/2004   09/01/2004 - 10/01/2004   10/01/2004 - 11/01/2004   12/01/2004 - 01/01/2005   04/01/2005 - 05/01/2005   06/01/2005 - 07/01/2005   12/01/2006 - 01/01/2007  

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?